Friday, August 26, 2011

The case for Siddall in the Hall

A close look at the most dominant reliever of his time

There's been a lot of speculation on whether or not Christoper Siddall will get enough votes to get into the Hall of Fame this season. And I'll admit, I'm probably a bit biased because Siddall was a Dirtbag for the first seven seasons of this world's existence. But his numbers simply cannot be denied -- he was the most dominant reliever of his era, hands down. It's really not even close.

The biggest knock on Siddall is probably that he doesn't have enough saves to get in. And if you're a reliever without any saves, you don't have much of a chance to get in the Hall of Fame. Generally, I would agree with that stance. A reliever would really have to have been dominant -- historically dominant -- to get consideration without any saves.

Well, Siddall was historically dominant. For a reliever or a starter, Siddall owns The Bigs' pitching record books. He is The Bigs all-time career leader in strikeout/walk ratio (a ridiculous 3.84), WHIP (1.03) and on base percentage allowed (.266). He is number two all-time in ERA (2.61) and slugging percentage allowed (.311) and third all-time in batting average allowed (.212).

So he doesn't have 300 saves. Big deal. He threw almost 1200 innings, which is more than borderline Hall of Fame starting pitchers like Vin Solano, and threw over 100 innings in each of his first nine seasons in The Bigs. So it's not like he didn't play long enough.

People can get caught up in the saves category but it's really a lot like the RBI stat -- based largely on outside factors. Siddall couldn't control how many saves he got much like hitters can't control whether or not there are runners on base when they come to bat. I chose to use Siddall as a setup A so that I could get the most innings pitched out of him. All he could control was how well he pitched when he was in the game and he ended up being better than any pitcher, starter or reliever, EVER. The only pitcher who could even be considered better than him is his ex-teammate Javier Henriquez.

Still think he's not Hall of Fame worthy?

No comments: